Leave it as is, nobody is going to buy autohotkey . net - let the make their 2 cts a year with "advertising" (searchengines and antivirus software are going to block traffic to that website soon enough if there is "fishy" stuff on it - you can even take the time to report the domain to google and antivirus venders).

I don't completely understand how you lost the name to begin with......are the rules such that even if you have been paying for the domain in question, it can still be pulled out from in under you?
That just doesn't sound kosher at all.

Then, it is a name that was never really ours (for the lack of a better collective) to begin with? ....but, yet, there are lots of references to 'autohotkey.net' out there on 3rd party sites, if I am not mistaken, which would make using a different domain name difficult. How were we even using 'autohotkey.net' to begin with?

It is sounding to me like it never really WAS ours to being with, and now someone has squatted on the name (which I think is a reprehensible thing to do, but there is no law against it, so people will do it in the interest of making a buck)

I am quite sure it was ours at the time when it was hacked, but I don't remember the specifics (I am sure the mods and admins from back then can), but I assume we lost control over the net-domain during the time, when we hadn't control over the domain autohotkey.com either... which lead to the founding of the LLC and the temporary domain ahkscript.org which, fortunately, later could be re-united with the original autohotkey.com domain. (Compare https://autohotkey.com/foundation/history.html)

MrJamesEMcBride wrote:Then, it is a name that was never really ours (for the lack of a better collective) to begin with? ....but, yet, there are lots of references to 'autohotkey.net' out there on 3rd party sites, if I am not mistaken, which would make using a different domain name difficult. How were we even using 'autohotkey.net' to begin with?

It is sounding to me like it never really WAS ours to being with, and now someone has squatted on the name (which I think is a reprehensible thing to do, but there is no law against it, so people will do it in the interest of making a buck)

Autohotkey.net was ours. it got hacked and we lost everything on it which was a file repo. then the site admin at the time decided to stop renewing it. the problem is we still have thousands of orphaned links to it and it is now dishing out malicious content

Yeah, I think it is a lost cause to try to get the domain back, esp for that ridiculous price.

Too bad that site admin allowed it to lapse

I know that it probably wouldnt do much good, but anyone who keeps up with what is going on here will be able to change whatever links they have to their new locations. Those who don't keep up, well, they will still have garbage links on their sites.

I don't want to pay jerks (they arent criminals, even though what they are doing is amoral), but I also do not want to see this community go away.

There are various "how much traffic does this site have" website / tools out there, the results are of course a stab in the dark but if you check both the .com and .net domains you can see a huge difference in the number of visitors - .com is vastly bigger and the "ad revenue generated" by the .net is estimated at 1US$ a day (the average of a few I tried). So their .net traffic is very low and will continue to drop over time the more crap they put on it (browsers and AV will block it) - websites going "offline" happens all the time.

If I google for autohotkey . net google already suggests did you mean .com and only shows me .com results on the first page of results.

Sure it wouId be nice to have .net but anything over 5 dollars isn't worth it - perhaps one day a lawyer with an interest in AutoHotkey will see this page and volunteer to draft a proper "give it back" letter - until then I wouldn't loose any sleep over it.

It would also be nice to have all . net links from the old form actually "removed" (not just the javascript trick that is currently in place) - just have it point to the fixed "archive" post - that would require the old forum posts to be edited which could be a tricky task given the size.

Why are we not using domain arbitration?
Unless the current owners can demonstrate a LEGITIMATE claim to the domain, you can have it taken away from them.
WE DO NOT NEED A TRADEMARK. We are AutoHotkey, they have ZERO claim to an AHK domain. This should be very plain sailing as it is clearly cybersquatting - there is nothing on the domain AutoHotkey.net which is to do with AHK - therefore, they have no claim to it, and if they are openly selling it on the market with no valid claim to it, that's cybersquatting.

It is definitely worth the effort of filing a UDRP dispute. All registrars (GoDaddy, NameCheap, etc) are bound by the UDRP and will abide by its rules. Given the details of the circumstances here, I believe there is a good chance of a favorable (and free) ruling and return of the domain name.

UDRP:

Disputes alleged to arise from abusive registrations of domain names (for example, cybersquatting) may be addressed by expedited administrative proceedings that the holder of trademark rights initiates by filing a complaint with an approved dispute-resolution service provider

Two things have to happen. 1. File a complaint (google UDRP for instructions). 2. Prove you have trademark rights to the name.

Do those two things to the satisfaction of the UDRP ruling panel and you win - the domain name will be yours for free and it doesn't matter whether or not you ever owned the name previously.

Here is a quote from the panel deciding these matters so you get an idea of what they are looking for. Essentially, you need to establish your history and show sufficient prior use of the name exists so that third parties (users for instance) uniquely identify the name with your company and goods and services (the website, the forums, the program). That's it. You have a few thousand links, an entire user base of interested third parties that associate and uniquely identify the name Autohotkey with you and your company and the associated programs and services with a history going back many years.

Just make sure the evidence showing this is in the complaint. If it isn't in the complaint, it never happened and doesn't exist. Assume the panel doesn't know, doesn't care, never heard of AutohotKey, doesn't know what a macro is or why anyone would want one, and won't bother to research anything not in the complaint.

Here is a quote from them to show their thinking on common law (from the article linked above):

So what kind of evidence of common law rights should be used? As the Panel also stated in Chandler Horsley, “to prove common law rights, it is necessary to file evidence regarding the extensive and continuous use, enough to be considered sufficient by the Panel as to identify the goods or services specified by the trademark owner. The Panel considers relevant evidence of secondary meaning include the income produced by the trademark (sales), the advertisement, and media recognition”.

As held in Molecular Nutrition, Inc. v. Network News, FA 156715 (NAF June 24, 2003) a Complainant will fail to establish common law rights in its mark by making mere assertions of such rights, as such mere assertions are insufficient without accompanying evidence to demonstrate that the public actually identifies Complainant’s mark exclusively or primarily with the Complainant’s products.

Accordingly, in the absence of registered trademark rights, a Complainant should always lead with strong evidence of common law trademark rights, including sales figures, advertising budget and scope, media reports, website traffic, affidavits, and whatever other evidence will assist the Panel in concluding that the purported mark is actually identified with the Complainant to a sufficient degree to be considered an actual common law trademark.

jfergie wrote:...All registrars (GoDaddy, NameCheap, etc) are bound by the UDRP and will abide by its rules....

I recently cancelled a pricey business account with GoDaddy and they just chose/forgot/`I don't know` to not refund the money.
Expect nothing from them without a huge fight, litigation, run-arounds or confusion.